April 25, 2000 - Regular Planning Board Meeting
CITY OF EAST PROVIDENCE
PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF APRIL 25, 2000
(additional meeting)
PRESENT WERE: Mr. Poland, Mr. Ditraglia, Mr. Medeiros, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Gerstein, Jeanne Boyle (staff), Diane Feather (staff), and City Solicitor Conley, and Stephen Coutu, Deputy Director of Public Works.
SEATING OF ALTERNATE MEMBER
Mr. Gerstein was seated as a voting member.
APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
A. Ms. Boyle noted that some corrections are necessary to the April ll, 2000 minutes. She noted that Mr. Cunha was present at the April 11 meeting and not Mr. Medeiros, and under New Business there should have been a roll call vote on the extension that Mr. Eugene Voll was requesting for the Chafee Street subdivision. Mr. DiTraglia stated he took a lot of notes and said there were things that he stated at this meeting that were left out in the minutes. She stated because the tape did not work properly there was less detail in these minutes. She noted this would be corrected to include all statements that the Board members made. She explained that the minutes are not the transcript, and if there were any issues that came up we would request a transcript from the court reporter since this was a public hearing.
Mr. Poland asked about the roll call vote on the Voll petition. Ms. Boyle stated that the actual roll call vote listing each of the members was not noted in the minutes. She said that would be corrected also.
Mr. Poland said it was not stated in the April ll minutes that there was a vote on the conservation area for the Waterview Subdivision. Ms. Boyle stated it was and stated that the Board unanimously voted on it. She said it is noted on page 10, but it was not done by roll call vote. Mr. Poland stated that under item 2 on the approval, he made a point that this would be recorded on the plan sheets and also on each deed, which included the covenants, and noted Mr. Conley made his recommendation on how it could be done, and that was also not noted in the minutes. It should all have been added to item #2. Ms. Boyle stated it is noted on page five of the minutes regarding the discussion on this and stated that the Notice of Decision reflects that.
Mr. Coutu stated he also has some changes to the minutes and would send them to Ms. Boyle. It was noted that after everyone submits their changes, the Board would vote on the minutes at the May 9, 2000 meeting.
Ms. Boyle said that if you were to compare the minutes of the Planning Board with the minutes of the City Council, and Zoning Board you would find that they are much much more detailed and extensive. She stated we do a very good job in providing a very clear indication as to what happens in these meetings compared to what other departments do. She noted we do rely on our equipment to back up since we are not sitting here taking detailed minutes and we rely on the transcription of these meeting in case we are challenged with an appeal. She noted that if it was appealed, we would have to pay the stenographer to provide a full transcription of the proceedings and it would probably cost several hundred dollars for a four hour meeting. Ms. Boyle noted the minutes are a very good legal document that shows what happened at the meeting, who voted etc.
On a motion by Mr. DiTraglia, seconded by Mr. Sullivan the Board voted to defer the approval of the April 11, 2000 minutes until the corrections and incorporation of notes by the members have been made.
APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD CORRESPONDENCE
There was no correspondence.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Appl. #00-10 Minor Subdivision of Dewey Avenue - Applicant: Luis Mateus, Map 405, Block 3, Parcel 37.
Ms. Boyle explained this is a minor subdivision on an existing street and no public hearing is required. She explained it is a splitting of one lot into two lots. She noted that the applicant is requesting that both preliminary and final approval be simultaneously granted by the Board. She said that if there is a situation where there are no conditions associated with it, then the Board could vote on both the preliminary and final tonight, and then the plans could be recorded after the 20-day appeal period.
Ms. Boyle explained that this subdivision is the reason for this additional Planning Board meeting this month. The petitioner proceeded on the information given by the previous Zoning Officer that constructing two single-family homes could be done on an as-of-right basis. When the time came for the title search to go through, the attorney for the petitioner identified that this was in fact one lot that required minor subdivision approval to create two lots. She said it was brought to her attention by Mr. Mateus and she concurred with his attorney that this was in fact a minor subdivision. This is why it is being required to come before the Board. It was basically an error made by the City's former Zoning Officer. She noted that the error was compounded because building permits were issued for the two dwellings that are currently being constructed on this lot, so there is some urgency associated with getting this approval as quickly as possible so that conveyance of these properties can proceed.
City Solicitor Conley swore in Luis Mateus, 582 Warren Avenue, East Providence. He stated that he has a 10,000 sq.ft. parcel which is zoned R-4. He came in to get two building permits for two single-family dwellings and was granted these permits. He obtained the permits, built the houses and sold the houses. When it came time for the title search to be done for the closings on the properties, it was brought to my attention by the title searcher that this should have been a subdivision. He said at this time he came in to see Jeanne Boyle and she concurred with the attorney that he needed to go through the subdivision process. He stated that as far as Zoning is concerned, the proposal meets zoning requirements. He stated he is here to legally subdivide the property so he can proceed with the sales.
Mr. Medeiros asked Mr. Mateus about the address he had just given when he was sworn in. Mr. Mateus stated his home address is 5 Gillian Court, Seekonk, MA, but filed his application through his work address which is 582 Warren Avenue.
Mr. Sullivan asked in reference to a letter submitted by Barker Land Surveying stating there are no sidewalks or curbing on Dewey Avenue, if staff checked on the accuracy of those statements. Ms. Boyle stated this was referred to Public Works to check that issue. Mr. Sullivan asked if we got verification from Public Works that there were no sidewalks. Ms. Boyle stated no, we did not get verification, but noted Public Works has requested that the waiver for the granite curbing not be granted. Staff concurs with the recommendation of Public Works. Staff is recommending approval of the requested waiver for sidewalks. Ms. Boyle stated there are sidewalk standards in the subdivision regulations that require concrete sidewalks of between four and six feet in width, depending on whether there is an existing condition to match. Mr. Sullivan stated there are concrete slabs on Dewey Avenue, but that he was confused with what the staff was recommending. Ms. Boyle reiterated that staff is recommending approval of the waiver for sidewalks, but denial of the requested waiver for granite curbing, so they would have to install granite curbing. Mr. Sullivan stated he thought this was all finalized. Ms. Boyle stated no, it is up to the Board tonight whether to go with the staff recommendation.
Mr. Gerstein asked who determines where the sidewalks and curbing should be and asked if they should be put in on both sides of the street and not just one side as seen in some neighborhoods. Ms. Boyle explained that if it is a new subdivision coming before the Planning Board, the Board would make that decision. The city's standard for new construction, and even for subdivisions on existing streets, is for granite curbing and cement sidewalks in front of all the properties that are subject to the subdivision. The Board has granted a number of waivers in the past of either of those standards. What the Board often looks at is the presence of sidewalks and curbing in the area. She noted that in new subdivisions, sometimes the Board will approve a request by a developer to provide sidewalks on only one side. As a general rule, Ms. Boyle stated she feels that the sidewalks are a very desirable part of a neighborhood for pedestrian circulation and granite curbing is also an important standard to uphold because of its durability and also because of the benefits of drainage. She stated it is the Board's prerogative and authority to issues the waivers on sidewalks and curbing.
Ms. Boyle stated that this one parcel consisted of five prior recorded lots of 20 feet in width by 100 feet in depth, which were platted many years, around the turn of the century. She stated that under the City's Zoning lot merger if you have undersized lots that are under the same ownership, the City's Zoning merges those into one lot, so even though they were platted as five lots many years ago, the minimum requirement in this district is for a lot of no less that 50 x 100 feet.
She said Mr. Mateus proposes to split that l0,000 sq.ft. lot into two 5,000 sq.ft. lots which meet zoning requirements. This is probably why it slipped through the cracks because he came in with two lots which met all dimensional standards. However, she stated that under the zoning lot merger, all of the rights to all five of those lots were lost and it was combined into one. Even though he is splitting it in a way that is fully in conformance with all zoning requirements, it is still a minor subdivision because he has to create a new lot line separating the two lots.
Ms. Boyle stated that staff does recommend approval of the waiver of the sidewalks, but is recommending denial of the waiver for granite curbing. It is the Board's prerogative as to whether or not they wish to go along with those recommendations. She stated that if the board were to go along with the staff recommendation on the granite curbing, a modification to the plans as submitted would have to be made because the plans as submitted do not show installation of granite curbing along the frontage, nor do they shown installation of the sidewalks.
Required Findings
Ms. Boyle stated we do find that the subdivision is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This area is designated as low density residential and meets the eight dwelling units per acre requirement for that. All lots in the subdivision conform to Zoning. There will be no significant environmental impacts. She noted that both lots are able to accommodate construction, and both lots have adequate access to a City street. Staff also feels that the proposed subdivision allows for safe circulation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and deals adequately with surface runoff and the subdivision is also located on an existing public street. Also, there is no issue of flooding.
Waivers
Staff recommends approval of the waiver of the sidewalks, but does not recommend approval of the waiver for granite curbing. Staff also recommends that the Board agree to the request of Mr. Mateus to combine the preliminary and final plan approvals since there are no outstanding issues that need to be addressed.
Staff recommends preliminary and final approval, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the title block be revised and indicate final plan status, which has already been done with the plans we have received;
2. That the final plans be based upon the approved preliminary plans. These plans would have to reflect whatever the Board's decision is on the waiver requests.
Mr. DiTraglia asked Mr. Mateus if there were any sidewalks and curbing in that area where he built these houses. He answered no. Mr. DiTraglia stated that we try to be uniform with the curbing and sidewalks if the area has it.
Mr. Sullivan asked to have the area defined. Mr. Poland answered it would be the immediate area of the subdivision, but it is not noted exactly what the immediate area would be in the ordinance.
Mr. Sullivan stated that Dewey Avenue has quite a bit of curbstone in it. He stated that the surveyors report that there are no sidewalks or curbing on Dewey Avenue is not correct. He stated we are not talking about the house that is next to this property, we are talking about Dewey Avenue. He noted that the best time to install these improvements is when there is a new development.
Mr. Poland commented for the record that small subdivisions like this should not be subject to the same regulations as a major subdivision with 20, 40 or l00 houses in it. He stated that he was told that a neighborhood's existing condition would be taken into account on whether sidewalks and curbing would be required. However, he stated that every time a subdivision comes up, they automatically recommend granite curbing and sidewalks, even though we did not want our Regulations to impose the same standards on small subdivisions as those of large subdivisions. Mr. Poland stated for these reasons, he is going to vote against requiring Mr. Mateus to install sidewalks and granite curbing.
Mr. Poland stated this is a good example in that the City made a big mistake with the process in that Mr. Mateus relied on the city to give him accurate information. He got his building permit, inspections from the City etc., he sold the houses under the impression that it was legal to build these houses and now he has to come before the Planning Board, an expense to himself to get this subdivision approved to legalize the lots. He feels because of this the City should not insist on him installing curbing and sidewalks because of the additional expense. Mr. Poland stated that because he was given wrong information at the beginning and if he had come before us before he had built the houses and the Board would have made him put in sidewalks and curbing at that time, then he could have included this on the prices on the overall house expenses.
For the record, Mr. Poland also stated that when we were drafting the Regulations, I objected to people having to come before us to get a subdivision on two perfectly legal lots like this one. He said there were five 20 foot lots that were merged into one lot. Because there were two legal lots there they should have been divided legally into two lots and not merged into one lot. He stated Mr. Mateus's lots are perfectly legal, there is no zoning variance, he has the width and depth and square footage. Also for the record, Mr. Poland stated these types of lots should have been exempted from our subdivision ordinance.
Mr. Medeiros concurred with Mr. Poland's comments and stated that it would be difficult for Mr. Mateus to reprice his houses after the fact and for this reason he will approve the requested waivers.
Mr. Poland asked if there were any other comments. There were none.
First Motion - Requested waivers for sidewalks and curbing.
On a motion by Mr. DiTraglia, seconded by Mr. Medeiros, the Board voted to grant the waiver for sidewalks and curbing.
Roll Call Vote
Mr. DiTraglia Aye
Mr. Gerstein Aye
Mr. Medeiros Aye
Mr. Sullivan Nay
Mr. Poland Aye
Second Motion - Subdivision Approval
On a motion by Mr. DiTraglia, seconded by Mr. Medeiros, the Board voted to grant preliminary and final plan approval for the proposed minor subdivision subject to the following conditions:
1. That the title block be revised to indicate final plan status; and
2. That the final plans and supporting documentation meet the requirements of the East Providence Land Development and Subdivision Review Regulations.
Roll Call Vote
Mr. DiTraglia Aye
Mr. Gerstein Aye
Mr. Medeiros Aye
Mr. Sullivan Aye
Mr. Poland Aye
B. Application #2000-9 New Rumford Fire Station Minor Subdivision - Corner of Greenwood Avenue and North Broadway- Map 403, Block 22, Parcel 1.
Ms. Feather distributed two memoranda to the Board on this subdivision, one dated April 24, 2000 from the Zoning Officer to Stephen Coutu and the other dated April 24, 2000 from Gerald Bessette, Fire Chief to Jeanne Boyle. Ms. Feather noted that because the Zoning Officer was on National Guard duty, he was unable to get his memorandum to us in time for inclusion in the Planning Board packet.
On a motion by Mr. DiTraglia, seconded by Mr. Medeiros the Board unanimously voted to accept these two memoranda for the Board's official record.
Mr. Poland noted that the Fire Chief could not be at this meeting because he is on vacation.
At this time Ms. Feather explained the minor subdivision process to the abutters in attendance. Ms. Feather asked if the abutters who were at the meeting received the notice and reduced subdivision plan. They answered yes.
Ms. Feather stated the Board is being asked to take action on a preliminary plan for this subdivision. The Board can also decide to delegate final plan approval to the Planning Director as the Administrative Officer under the City's Subdivision Regulations, and noted that the Board has 65 days from the time that this plan was deemed complete in order to make a decision on the subdivision.
She noted that the lot which is being subdivided is currently owned by HOD Associates, and the applicant is the City of East Providence. Lot 1 is proposed to consist of 54,011 sq.ft. and Lot 2 will consist of 4l0,l96 sq.ft..
Ms. Feather noted there are two existing structures which will be located on Lot 2, the office building which fronts on Greenwood Avenue and the larger warehouse property that is located closer to the center of the property. Lot l is currently used for storage of trailers. She noted that there are no wetlands on the proposed Lot l. Ms. Feather noted that the existing Rumford Fire Station is located a short distance north of this land, and that station would be replaced by the new fire station to be located on proposed Lot l. She noted there are no architectural or site plan drawings for the proposed fire station at this time. She said the purpose of the action by the Board tonight is simply to create a lot on which to place a fire station.
Ms. Feather noted that the property is zoned I-1, with the exception of a small piece of Residential-3 towards the east side of the property that extends to a paper street (Weaver Avenue). An I-l district requires a minimum area of 30,000 sq.ft. and a minimum width of l50 feet and minimum depth of l50 feet. The lots exceed the minimum requirements for zoning in this particular district.
Regarding sidewalks and curbing, Ms. Feather stated that the Planning Board does have the authority to require granite curbing and sidewalks at the time they review subdivision plans, and to look for opportunities to extend existing sidewalks and existing curbing. Ms. Feather stated Lot 1 has sidewalks and granite curbing on the N. Broadway frontage which extend around the corner at the Greenwood Avenue frontage and then stop, with no sidewalks or curbing for the remainder of the frontage. She said the City is committing to install granite curbing and sidewalks for the entire frontage of Lot 1. Ms. Feather noted there is a wider right-of-way width on Greenwood Avenue (58 feet), so there is ample room for a sidewalk. However, she noted that we could not show this on the plan at this time because the design for the fire station has not been established.
Ms. Feather noted that staff is not proposing the installation of granite and sidewalks for Lot 2. Ms. Feather noted that Lot 2 has about 800 feet of frontage that extends from the corner of proposed Lot 1 all the way down to the paper street portion of Weaver Avenue. She noted that there is a great deal of truck traffic that enters and exits this site from the warehousing operation from the larger building on the site, and at this point it would be impractical to place curbing and sidewalks along Lot 2.
Ms. Feather stated that the City's Comprehensive Plan designation for this particular piece of property is "Mixed Use". She noted that the existing uses and the proposed use are consistent with that mixed use designation, and approval of this subdivision would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. She also noted that the Board is required to make a number of required findings before they can approve a subdivision, and the subdivision must conform to Zoning. She noted that Lot l is not virgin land, and there are no wetlands on Lot 1 so we do not anticipate any environmental impacts. She also noted there are no topography or access issues, and the lots meet the dimensional requirements of Zoning. She stated there have been meetings with City staff and there is adequate space for the construction of a fire station. She noted it would have sewer and water utilities, and any necessary stormwater management could be handled.
Ms. Feather noted that staff is recommending approval of the subdivision. There are no modifications to the plan that are required, other than the fact that we need to indicate final plan status, so staff is recommending granting both preliminary and final plan approval, should the Board vote to give approval this evening.
Ms. Feather introduced Mr. Ernie DiSaia, who is an engineer consulting for the City on this project. She noted that he worked on the preparation of the plan and is available to answer questions.
At this time Mr. Ernie DiSaia, 300 Wampanoag Trail, East Providence was sworn in by the City Solicitor.
Mr. Poland asked if there were any questions by the Board.
Mr. Medeiros stated he was confused as to what the Zoning Officer's memorandum indicated in that the building is too close to the property of the boundary line, but said that staff, in its memorandum stated all lots shall conform to the standard of zoning. Ms. Feather stated the Zoning Officer is referring to adjoining property that is not owned by HOD Associates and is not part of the subdivision. With the aid of a map, Ms. Feather showed Mr. Medeiros the existing configuration of the lot. She noted that the setback of the building on the adjoining property is an existing condition that we do not have anything to do with, and that this subdivision is not proposing to change in any way. She noted the only lot line that we are creating here is to separate this corner piece from the remainder of the property owned by HOD Associates to the rear. She noted that staff did look at the existing uses that are on proposed Lot 2 to make sure that when we split this off, we are not creating any zoning issues on this property. She noted we had them indicate the areas for off-street parking for the warehouse and office building so we can be assured that the proposed subdivision is not impacting their ability to locate their off-street parking and loading on-site on Lot 2.
Mr. DiTraglia asked about road widths of North Broadway and Greenwood Avenue. He wanted to make sure that there is enough footage for the fire trucks to get in and out. Ms. Feather noted it is 55 feet in width on North Broadway and Greenwood Avenue is 58 feet in width.
Mr. Poland asked if there was any plan for this fire station as yet. Ms. Boyle answered no. He asked which way the fire station would face. She stated that has not been established at this time. She said this is a large enough lot to accommodate the size that has been looked at in other communities. Ms. Boyle said when the design is selected, it will be for maximum ability for the trucks to get in and out. She said if they can possibility avoid it, they do not want the fire trucks backing out into the street since it is very inefficient for response times. Mr. DiSaia said he and the Fire Chief have looked at the different fire stations in other cities.
Mr. Poland asked if Mr. DiSaia was consulting on the building of the fire station. He stated yes and stated he feels this lot will accommodate a new fire station. Mr. Poland asked Mr. DiSaia if there were any plans available on the design, parking, or landscaping? Mr. DiSaia answered no, we still have to go out for the request for proposals and then work with the architectural firm when hired. Mr. DiSaia stated there have not been any conceptuals done as yet, but that they have taken pictures and have some ideas in mind.
Mr. Sullivan asked who the property owner would be after this is finished. It was answered the City of East Providence. City Solicitor Conley stated the City anticipates closing as soon as the 20-day appeal period has expired.
Regarding the size of the proposed lot, Ms. Feather noted that on the radius map you can see the location of the existing Rumford Fire Station, and noted that the existing station is located on an oddly configured lot of only l4, 172 square feet. She noted we are proposing a lot in excess of 54,000 sq. ft., so this should result in much improved conditions for the new fire station.
Mr. Poland asked if there were any questions by the abutters.
Public Comment
Susan Varon, 31 N. Broadway was sworn in and asked if the new fire station will accommodate the same number of vehicles that the current fire station has, or will it be a larger fire station. Mr. DiSaia stated that it will be a larger facility and have more apparatus than is presently at the old fire station. He said the main reason why we need the new larger facility is to house the new apparatus equipment that is there now which the old building cannot house.
Ms. Varon asked if the new fire station would have to be one-story. Mr. DiSaia answered we prefer it to be a one story building, but it could be two stories, but it would not have the sliding pole as was in the older fire stations.
Ms. Varon asked if the tractor trailer trucks would still remain in that same parking area.
Ms. Boyle stated that if there are any tractor trailer trucks that are being stored on the proposed Lot 1, obviously once that comes under City of East Providence ownership, the City would no longer allow that to continue.
Mr. Robert Ravenall, 19 Beaumont Street, was sworn in. He asked about the tractor trailers that are on the lot and asked if they will be parked there once the City of East Providence takes over this lot. He said if they decide that the entrance to the new fire station is on Greenwood Avenue, all these trucks which come in an out of there would definitely impact on the entrance of the station since these trucks might have a problem turning the corner near the entrance of the fire station if it is on Greenwood Avenue.
Mr. Ravenall asked about the environmental issues. Ms. Feather stated that the Board needs to look at whether there are existing environmental constraints to the property, such as wetlands, soils and floodplains. He asked about the soil and if it had been contaminated by Rumford Chemical which used to own the lot. Ms. Boyle responded that prior to proceeding with the sale of the property, the City did have a Phase l environmental assessment of Lot 1 done, which did not reveal any contamination. That report showed it was a buildable site and appropriate for industrial or fire station purposes.
Ms. Varon asked if there will be a further public hearing and what the plans will look like once they are complete. Mr. Poland stated usually no, there will not be a formal meeting but there will be a informal neighborhood meeting for informational purposes or a meeting of the City Council that would include a conceptual plan of the fire station.
As far as the design process, Ms. Boyle stated it would have been presumptuous of the City to go forward with the design process the fire station on this property since it would not exist as a lot until after approval of the Planning Board.
Ms. Varon asked if when the tractor trailer trucks were removed from Lot 1, would Mr. Harty put them on Lot 2? Ms. Feather stated that this would be in keeping with the I-1 zoning of the property, but noted he could not extend the industrial use into the R-3 portion of his property. She noted that the owner has to maintain adequate room on-site to provide a minimum number of off-street parking spaces for the existing uses, so the trailers also could not interfere with that. She said he would not be allowed to do anything that would be inconsistent with the zoning of the property. Ms. Varon stated that that part of the property was filled with gypsum materials from the chemical company, so it is unstable soil and it would all have to be removed to be buildable. She stated she is curious as to where all these trucks will be moved to.
Mr. Poland asked Ms. Boyle to make the Zoning Officer aware of the concern of the neighbors regarding the tractor trailer parking. Ms. Boyle responded that that these trailers would not be allowed to park in that residential district. She stated the distance that that residential zone encompasses is from Weaver Avenue (which is 40 feet wide) and another 105 feet in from there. It is about 150 feet from the back of the nearest property line to anywhere where those trucks could be stored. Ms. Boyle stated she does not know the other site conditions, but certainly anything he does within that I-1 portion of the property has to meet zoning requirements. The other point Ms. Boyle states is that a public street is not intended for the storage of tractor trailer trucks as a public right-of-way. If he was to use it as a storage area, it would be brought to the attention of the City for enforcement.
Ms. Pamela Harrop, ll Beaumont Street, Rumford was sworn in expressed concern over a possible addition at the back of his building. She asked if the Planning Board knew anything about this addition. Ms. Boyle stated she did not, but said to keep in mind that there is 40 feet from Weaver Avenue and approximately 100 feet between the edge of Weaver Avenue and where the Industrial zone picks up, and said Mr. Harty could not do anything within that 150 foot residentially zoned area nor within Weaver Avenue, which carries that residential zoning designation.
Mr. Poland stated if he were to make any new additions to his building he would have to provide a solid landscaping buffer and six-foot fence between your zone and his zone, and noted he would have to conform to all the new regulations.
Ms. Boyle stated there is also a 24 inch drain that goes through there which would be cost prohibitive to relocate, and which could not be built on. She said this residential district is well protected from industrial encroachment. It would be extremely difficult for anyone to even attempt to build on it and the neighbors would have many, many opportunities to express their opinions.
Motion to enter the staff recommendation into the record.
On a motion by Mr. DiTraglia, seconded by Mr. Sullivan, the Board voted unanimously to enter the staff recommendation into the record of the application.
Roll Call Vote
Mr. DiTraglia Aye
Mr. Gerstein Aye
Mr. Medeiros Aye
Mr. Sullivan Aye
Mr. Poland Aye
Motion - Sidewalk and Curbing Waivers
On a motion made by Mr. DiTraglia, second by Mr. Sullivan, the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of a waiver from the requirement for the installation of sidewalks and granite curbing for the frontage of Lot 2 only (Lot l to be owned by the City will have sidewalks and granite curbing).
Roll Call Vote
Mr. DiTraglia Aye
Mr. Gerstein Aye
Mr. Medeiros Aye
Mr. Sullivan Aye
Mr. Poland Aye
Motion - Subdivision
On a motion by Mr. DiTraglia, seconded by Mr. Medeiros, the Board voted unanimously to grant Preliminary and Final approval of the subdivision as proposed, subject to the following conditions:
1. that the title block be revised to indicate Final Plan status; and
2. that the Final Plans be based upon the approved Preliminary Plans, and further that the Final Plan and supporting documentation meet the requirements of the East Providence Land Development and Subdivision Review Regulations.
Roll Call Vote
Mr. DiTraglia Aye
Mr. Gerstein Aye
Mr. Medeiros Aye
Mr. Sullivan Aye
Mr. Poland Aye
CONTINUED BUSINESS
COMMUNICATIONS
None
ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, May 9, 2000, Room 306, 7:30 p.m..
ADJOURNMENT
A. The meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Joseph Medeiros, Secretary
JM/DF/sac
--------------------------